Safety of Infant Vaccine Schedule Affirmed - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-28-2010, 10:02 AM
 
an_domhan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Great posts, thanks for sharing.
an_domhan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-28-2010, 01:39 PM
 
Sileree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 1,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post
This study is extremely misleading, and I can't explain it better than Ginger Taylor of Adventures in Autism, so I'll just link to her blog post, titled, "Thomas Maugh Can't Read." http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/
Ugh. The way the mainstream media and doctors lie about this issue really gets under my skin.

intactivist.gif  ribbonpb.gif RN student, bellycast.gif birth doula since 2006
Sileree is offline  
Old 05-28-2010, 02:52 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post
This study is extremely misleading, and I can't explain it better than Ginger Taylor of Adventures in Autism, so I'll just link to her blog post, titled, "Thomas Maugh Can't Read." http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/
awesome piece...read the link about the bias of the writer as well.....

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
Old 05-28-2010, 04:49 PM
 
Ambystoma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Bayou
Posts: 713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASusan View Post
I read the study quickly last night.

Two words: Bonferroni adjustment.
That's what I was going to say and you beat me to it!

My grad Stats class was basically how to spot a statistical "lie", how you could do one, and how you better not do it b/c it's unethical. It's sad to me that my peer biologists publishing in Journal of Morph or even Copeia hold each other up to a higher accountability statistically.

Quote:
Originally Posted by an_domhan View Post
There's no conceivable reason that they can't do this in an animal model, but the last time I said that to a skeptic they told me I couldn't extrapolate the data to humans. We do it all the time... otherwise no drugs would enter the marketplace.
I would like to see this.

Kara: on a journey with DH, Mama to DS 2/2010
Ambystoma is offline  
Old 05-28-2010, 05:48 PM
 
crunchy_mommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Only had time to skim it but this part really stood out:

"There were some significant differences between the children who received timely vaccination and those who did not. Those with on-time vaccinations were slightly younger at the time of neuropsychological assessment (mean 9.2 versus 9.4 years), their mothers were better educated, and they came from higher-income households...
Not one of the 42 tests showed better outcomes for those who did not have timely vaccine administration."


So the less-timely vaxed kids were lower income, mothers were less educated, etc? That doesn't really seem like a great comparison group... Where is the 'unvaxed kids' group for comparison? Then they say the timely vaxed kids performed slightly better on the tests... maybe because they had advantages -- slightly older & better economic conditions?? And there are way more shots now than in the 1993 schedule... The study pretty much is useless in my opinion...

Co-sleeping is really wonderful when your child actually SLEEPS!! familybed1.gif
crunchy_mommy is offline  
Old 05-28-2010, 07:40 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
One of the major questions people have is on the safety of several vaccines at one time. This study wasn't set up to address that because they didn't actually look at how many vaccines children received at one visit.

Also, I'd like to point out that it isn't the journalists who spin this stuff. They just go along with whatever the press release says.

So we really need to get hold of the original press release. I'm pretty sure that the misleading spin was in there...not added by the people writing the articles and blogs.
Deborah is online now  
Old 05-28-2010, 07:52 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
how this is being presented to doctors and clinicians:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/722594

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Vaccines/20249

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/ma...iclekey=116587

if anyone has a tough tummy, they can read all the way through all three of them and get a pretty good picture of the original press release sent out by Pediatrics to announce this "new" study.
Deborah is online now  
Old 05-29-2010, 03:23 AM
 
ema-adama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't read all of that Deborah, but I started here:

Quote:
May 27, 2010 — Delaying childhood vaccinations, or not getting immunized at all, does not provide any neuropsychological benefits for children at 7 to 10 years of age and might even result in poorer outcomes on some measures, a new study suggests.
No mention made of the exclusion criteria. It is a pretty confident statement to make given that this sample can in no way be representative of the population that is vaccinated. And the fact that adverse events like encephalitis are excluded. And that as far I have understood, Autism as an outomce was not included.

Quote:
"Parents may have heard that it's not safe to give their children all these vaccines in the first year of life, but we actually looked at kids 7 to 10 years later and they’re absolutely fine," Dr. Smith said in an interview. "That's a talking point for pediatricians to have with families in the office, although it may not convince everyone."
Yes, all of them were fine. Excpet for the ones who were excluded from the study. ANd of course the vaccines are repsonsible for the improved performace in the testing? It couldn't possibly be socioeconomic status? (to be fair a secondary analysis did find the socioeconomic status was a factor)

And I am sure this will be the take home message paediatricians get. And most will not read the study, let alone read it critically. (not becuase they are bad people, they just are very busy people)

And finally, this is not everything, but IMO it is relevant:

Quote:
Dr. Smith and Charles R. Woods, MD, MS, are or have been unfunded subinvestigators for cross-coverage purposes on vaccine clinical trials for which their colleagues receive funding from Wyeth, Sanofi Pasteur, GSK, MedImmune, and Novartis. Dr Woods has received honoraria for speaking engagements from Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, Pfizer, and MedImmune and has received research funding from Wyeth and Sanofi Pasteur.

Megan, mama to her little boy (Feb2008) and introducing our little girl (Dec 2010)
ema-adama is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off